[blml] AI or UI

[Gampas at aol.com]

In a message dated 22/11/2007 11:47:35 GMT Standard Time, agot at ulb.ac.be  
writes:

>> It would seem to me that the club void with the correct  opening leader is 
 UI 
>> to his partner, as this information was  "*arising* from its own  
withdrawn 
>> action" where "its" clearly  refers to the offending side, and "arising  
from" 
>> means, IMHO,  "occurring as a consequence of".
>   
>.AG : IMHO, it  arises as a consequence of declarer's choice, because it 
>wouldn't have  occurred, present the infraction but absent declarer's  
>decision.
>But you're right, it's open to  discussion.

>I'm ready to classify the case with the following one  :
>.East leads a Spade OOT. South requests a Spade lead from West, into  his 
>tenace. For some strange reason, it turns out to be the lethal lead.  
>Declarer was unlucky.
 
I would agree with the last case, and no adjustment is needed. However, I  do 
not see the two cases as at all comparable. In the case where the correct  
leader is asked to lead a club but is unable to comply, his club  void seems to 
be UI to his partner. His partner has only gained the  information as an 
indirect result of an infraction, albeit fortuitously.  "Arising from" does not 
imply "as a direct consequence of" either, or the clause  would say the latter. 
My interpretation would be that information which would  not have been gleaned 
had the infraction not occurred is UI.
 
I do not think that "arising from" indicates suddenness. The driver in the  
1963 Great Train Robbery, Jack Mills, had facial bruising and later health  
problems arising from being hit on the head with an iron bar. He eventually  died 
from leukemia, not arising from being hit with an iron bar.
 
Paul